SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1977 Supreme(Cal) 108

R.BHATTACHARYYA
KANAILAL DHOLEY – Appellant
Versus
KALICHARAN CHATTERJEE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
PARANTAP ROY, PRAFULLA KUMAR CHATTERJEE, PURNA CHANDRA BASU, RANJIT KUMAR BANERJEE

JANAH, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a Letters Patent appeal arising out of a second appeal. The heirs and legal representatives of the defendant No. 1 are the appellants before us.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff-respondent instituted a suit for a declaration that C. S. Khatian No. 164 of mouza Chalk Baidyabati recording a jama of Rs. 91 in respect of the land and the tank in the names of the defendants as tenants under the plaintiff was erroneous and also for a declaration of the plaintiff's khas dakhali title to the said tank and the land in the aforesaid khatian except 0. 27 acres of land on the bank of the tank in plot No. 823 which appertained to the defendants' jama of Ra 30. The trial court as well as the lower appellate court found in favour of the plaintiff and accordingly decreed the suit. The courts below also found that the garden and the tank in question had come in khas possession of the plaintiff in the year 1322 B. S. and since then Ambika Dholey possessed the same as an agent of the plaintiff and after the death of Ambika the defendants had been possessing the same as agents of the plaintiff. It was also found that 0. 27 acres of land on the bank of the tank in plot No. 823 appertained





Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top